Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Policy for migrating library consumers to subslots

[Ian Stakenvicius]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 26/09/13 11:24 AM, Davide Pesavento wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Kent Fredric
> <kentfredric@×××××.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 26 September 2013 19:53, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> How do we handle packages which install multiple libraries? I'm
>>> afraid forcing such a policy and/or hurrying developers to
>>> adapt will only cause more of poppler-like issues to occur.
>>
>>
>> Can you give a an example package which:
>>
>> - installs multiple libraries - has an ABI that may change for
>> only one of those libraries - it is sane / plausible to expect
>> one downstream dependent *not* to forcibly rebuild as a result of
>> a chane in one of those libaries - it is sane / plausible to
>> expect a different downstream to forcibly rebuild as a result of
>> changes in one of those libraries
>>
>
> dev-python/PyQt4
>
> Each module is a separate library, and each has its own ABI that
> can change independently from the others. Downstream projects that
> rely only on PyQt4's python API are not affected by ABI changes,
> but those (very few) that link against one or more modules (e.g.
> kde-base/pykde4 I think) must be rebuilt.
>

To better round off this example, I assume that the API itself also
changes as a whole, and slot-operators are the ideal means to force
rebuilds on all rdeps when that occurrs?

Otherwise, I don't see why this example couldn't be satisfied by
bumping subslot whenever any sub-ABI changes and only using
slot-operators in *DEPEND atoms on those very few packages that link
to the modules.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlJEcUAACgkQ2ugaI38ACPBgagD/QCVt4wgbzqykUf2aAi6iyFaR
ZQoI8NdXLuc2FvWZyqYBALGEOsrIGN+LnDndXhSaN1SId5P63ltU0ZQvByjiHqXN
=kl2D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----